|
Post by stig123 on Oct 28, 2016 18:42:30 GMT
Hate to admit it....but if Torquay United was my dog I would be tempted to have it put down in order to put it out of its misery. Truly a sad state of affairs. Barring another lottery win it looks like we are screwed.
|
|
|
Post by plainmoorpete on Oct 28, 2016 19:32:48 GMT
If the board go with the property developers that will save TUST's face, because if they were to take over now they simply would not have enough time to raise the capital needed by the end of January. Wrexham supporters trust had £400,000 ready before they took over their club; if TUST intend on sticking around ready to take the reins if the new owners decide to part with the club then they must be more financially prepared. Save TUST's face? How exactly? If TUST took over the club on 31st October they would have just 3 months to raise the money to pay off the GI loan. If they failed they would then have to either hand over the keys to GI or put the club into administration. That would be a massive loss of face. Like I said they simply do not have enough time. Even if they could launch a successful community share issue I can not see it raising enough money to keep the club from going part time. You mentioned being able to raise £250,000. That isn't going to be enough to sustain the full time professional club trying to get back into the EFL that you want. Our current playing budget is £400,000 and for that we get a team struggling in the lower half of the table attracting crowds of around 1500. When Bristol Rovers scrapped through the play offs a couple of years ago it cost them £2 million. TUST can play a role in keeping football in Torquay but it is going to have to be a very different model than you have been used to in the past.
|
|
jerry
TFF member
Posts: 165
|
Post by jerry on Oct 28, 2016 20:15:12 GMT
If TUST took over the club on 31st October they would have just 3 months to raise the money to pay off the GI loan. If they failed they would then have to either hand over the keys to GI or put the club into administration. That would be a massive loss of face. Like I said they simply do not have enough time. Even if they could launch a successful community share issue I can not see it raising enough money to keep the club from going part time. You mentioned being able to raise £250,000. That isn't going to be enough to sustain the full time professional club trying to get back into the EFL that you want. Our current playing budget is £400,000 and for that we get a team struggling in the lower half of the table attracting crowds of around 1500. When Bristol Rovers scrapped through the play offs a couple of years ago it cost them £2 million. TUST can play a role in keeping football in Torquay but it is going to have to be a very different model than you have been used to in the past. That 400,000 budget comes from the club's current income which would still be there if TUST took over. Or are we suddenly not going to have any gate or sponsorship income? Any monies raised by a community share issue would be in addition to our current income.
|
|
Rob
TFF member
Posts: 3,607
Favourite Player: Asa Hall
|
Post by Rob on Oct 28, 2016 21:12:51 GMT
If TUST took over the club on 31st October they would have just 3 months to raise the money to pay off the GI loan. If they failed they would then have to either hand over the keys to GI or put the club into administration. That would be a massive loss of face. Like I said they simply do not have enough time. Even if they could launch a successful community share issue I can not see it raising enough money to keep the club from going part time. You mentioned being able to raise £250,000. That isn't going to be enough to sustain the full time professional club trying to get back into the EFL that you want. Our current playing budget is £400,000 and for that we get a team struggling in the lower half of the table attracting crowds of around 1500. When Bristol Rovers scrapped through the play offs a couple of years ago it cost them £2 million. TUST can play a role in keeping football in Torquay but it is going to have to be a very different model than you have been used to in the past. That 400,000 budget comes from the club's current income which would still be there if TUST took over. Or are we suddenly not going to have any gate or sponsorship income? Any monies raised by a community share issue would be in addition to our current income. The simplest of points well put, Jerry. Often seems to get missed.
|
|
aj
TFF member
Posts: 11
|
Post by aj on Oct 28, 2016 22:04:05 GMT
Fans of TUFC,
You can call us the whistle blowers if you like. If you feel the information you are about to read is incorrect, we apologise profusely for giving you our opinion (that is based on fact).
1. Pete Masters, GI, Dave Phillips and Rob S all stand to gain from TUFC while the club and fans lose out. We have not named other directors because we know that they are oblivious to the facts. We would like to inform you that Dave Phillips as a bookie, will always try to spread his risk. This means that he has no intention of making a loss. Fans should be under no illusion that he has always wanted to make a profit from TUFC along with some of the other directors regardless.
2. We have bought Rob S into the equation because he is not just the Club Secretary; he also owns a security company that does the security for the club on match days. He is also acting as CEO (unofficially); note that they have not appointed a new CEO - you can make your own minds up on this matter yourselves. Rob stands to gain from either GI and/or Pete Masters, as a fan based run club, he would propbably not be there because fans would employ a more affordable security sytem.
3. Truro fans have made it very clear that they believe that something is adrift with the development of the new Truro football stadium and Pete Masters continuous regular visits to TUFC- Development has been delayed for over 8 months and may not go ahead. However, they do have planning permission and based on the fact that Pete Masters has invested in excess £50,000 in TUFC on the so called 'ground share' along with GI's large "loan". Anyone with common sense will realise that Truro fans would have to travel in excess of 200 miles every game (held at Plainmore). This is a smoke screen from Dave Phillips and Pete Masters.
4. From the information we have to hand we believe that GI will obtain the shares for Plainmore that will be worthless to them because Torbay Council will not give them permission to develop Plainmore. However, it is more than likely that GI will give the shares to Pete Masters in return for the Truro development site, that has been granted planning permission for a new stadium (this planning can be amended to suit their needs). With this in mind, Dave Phillips will get his return and this deal would not include the other directors. This deal would suit all of the above mentioned.
5. We do not anticipate Pete Masters investing £3,000,000 like Mrs Bristow and her family have. Furthermore, it would, in a short period of time, return the club to the crisis it is currently in.
6. There have been a lot of nasty things said about the TUST and in fact, this is being directed at the fans because the fans are the TUST. We believe that the TUST are justified in attempting a rescue plan at the 11th hour and we would like to show you how the fans can save the club. We know that the club has in excess of 12,000 fans nationally and internationally. If only 2,500 fans paid £100 in 1 month that would raise £250, 000 in that month. If 5,000 fans paid £50, that would still be £250,000. This would not include any fundraising carried out throughout Devon and beyond.
As someone has already pointed out; it is not just the TUFC fans who would rise to support their club, people will do all that they can to support their local community team, including local schools, colleges, universities and businesses etc.
7. Fans should realise that the TUST is trying to rescue the club. We believe that this will be successful, regardless of geographical differences between TUFC and other football clubs, the TUST with the support, can raise the necessary funds, without lining the pockets of private individuals; no other community owned club has invested in private individuals or private companies when they have taken on a football club and rightly so.
8. All TUFC fans should be aware that the TUFC directors who are in the know, have kept the TUST at a distance (and the fans in the dark) and have shown no respect to the TUST and as such, have shown no respect to the fans because the TUST represents and works on behalf of the fans. Clearly some fans are being hoodwinked about what is really going on. Certain TUFC directors are deliberately muddying the waters for fans and other directors. Hopefully all fans and some of the other directors will see what is really going on and will put a stop to the shennanigans.
We are certain that Rob and one or two others (who are linked to the board) will immediately criticise this post because, they stand to lose out. Fans should not forget that when Pete Masters was interested just a few years ago, he produced bank statements showing that he had a few million to spare; he did not get the club; that is very telling in itself.
We would not know all of this information unless we had it from the horses mouth; some of you are speculating who is posting this. We can tell you that we are the whistle blowers.
Support the TUST and this way you will be running TUFC and you will always be heard because you will be TUFC. There are many people who are working behind the scenes to ensure the future of TUFC but they will not support the current regime because they do not want to put money in the pocket of private individuals. There is no explanation as to where all the money given to the directors/TUFC has gone. They have taken no responsibility for there actions. However, it is highly likely that Pete Masters and Dave Phillips, along with others, will be able to explain to the Conference investigators who may well have begun to look into this matter. We cannot confirm this is definate, we can confirm that a large proportion of serious complaints have been made to the appropriate regulatory bodies. Should any director be found guilty of any maladministration they can be held personally liable.
We all want TUFC to succeed long into the future; support a community onwership, support the TUST and we can all achieve our goal - saving TUFC long term.
Yours sincerely
The whistle-blowers
|
|
rjdgull
TFF member
Admin
Posts: 12,225
|
Post by rjdgull on Oct 29, 2016 8:19:50 GMT
I think readers of this site should consider very carefully what is written in the post by AJ and how it fits in with what we know. I am very sceptical about some of the content but there is undoubtedly a lot of manoeuvring going on at the club and this will come out in the wash.
We do know Masters is a "trusted advisor" at the club and this would not reflect well on the current board if he does have designs on taking over.....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2016 8:29:31 GMT
Floridagull
However well intentioned the 'whistle blowers' might be, it's that inability to establish credibility, which Floridagull highlights, that will almost definitely mean these alleged revelations don't manage to have their desired effect.
For instance, statements such as 'There is no explanation as to where all the money given to the directors/TUFC has gone', really do need to come to us directly from the horse's mouth rather than via a third party. Either an official TUST statement, or one issued by those who have conducted the examination of the clubs books, would have massive authority if it concluded that money is unaccounted for or just seems to disappear to destinations unknown.
The fan on the terrace would wonder why the Directors would open up the books to reveal that money disappears with no adequate explanation, and what answers the TUST received when they questioned this ? Likewise, knowing that TUST's meetings with the club were increased in regularity to every month, and in addition they've been given permission to examine the confidential financial situation of the club, the ordinary fan must wonder just what sort of access fans groups at other clubs must get if this is an example of being 'kept at a distance' ?
Despite the valiant efforts of the 'whistle blowers', I'm with Floridagull on this one, in wanting to see the whistle in the actual horses mouth, and then to hear it being blown.
|
|
|
Post by plainmoorpete on Oct 29, 2016 9:42:16 GMT
It is probably by Colin Authers. It is in a similar style to earlier posts that were sent by TUfans ltd, and remember that bay52/Joe has started posting again. The dead give away is that it was only posted on this forum and none of the others as was the case with previous TUfans ltd posts.
|
|
|
Post by plainmoorpete on Oct 30, 2016 10:42:56 GMT
That 400,000 budget comes from the club's current income which would still be there if TUST took over. Or are we suddenly not going to have any gate or sponsorship income? Any monies raised by a community share issue would be in addition to our current income. The simplest of points well put, Jerry. Often seems to get missed. Except the gates are declining and will decline further if the on field performance doesn't improve. The break even attendance for this season is 2200, we are now below 1500. As the club becomes less attractive to the supporters so it becomes less attractive to commercial sponsors. We only stayed up last season with the help of a loan from GI which we now need to pay back, a year previously we needed a £200k loan from Thea Bristow; so where is the money going to come from next? OK so you say from a community share issue, but you can't keep going back and asking for more without the community eventually telling you to get lost. The only chance of survival for the club under community ownership is to find its correct financial break even level, and that will not be in a full time league.
|
|
Jon
Admin
Posts: 6,912
|
Post by Jon on Oct 30, 2016 19:26:02 GMT
The only chance of survival for the club under community ownership is to find its correct financial break even level... I suppose that observation does not apply under private ownership as we can continue borrowing money from benevolent property developers and we won't ever have to pay it back. and that will not be in a full time league. We are not the smallest club in the National League.
|
|
Jon
Admin
Posts: 6,912
|
Post by Jon on Oct 30, 2016 19:29:28 GMT
An acquaintance of Pete Masters, eh. I am not sure if that is true really. I posted the link to Bernard visiting Truro, but I don't know if that makes him an "acquaintance of Pete Masters" as such. I bumped into Bernard yesterday and had a chat. Nice bloke. He confirmed that he is NOT an acquaintance of Peter Masters.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2016 21:14:25 GMT
Jon
Nice bloke he may be, but of more interest to many of us would be to learn whether you believe there's any reason to doubt the truthfulness of the statement of a TFF member posted elsewhere a few weeks ago ?
|
|
|
Post by plainmoorpete on Oct 30, 2016 23:43:33 GMT
The only chance of survival for the club under community ownership is to find its correct financial break even level... I suppose that observation does not apply under private ownership as we can continue borrowing money from benevolent property developers and we won't ever have to pay it back. and that will not be in a full time league. We are not the smallest club in the National League. I am not making the argument for private ownership, I have stated in previous posts that I have come round to viewing community ownership as the clubs only hope for its long term survival. But neither TUST or yourself has said what is the sustainable business plan is, which is the question Florida originally asked. As for us not being one the smallest clubs in the league, yesterday only four clubs had attendance's lower than ours. Do TUST still want to own the club? The proposed fan's forum was cancelled according to Dave Philips because of the inclusive outcome of talks between TUST and the board. I wonder if the board offered TUST the running of the club and they turned it down. Then this Saturday a group of local Chinese business men are seen at the ground, one of whom is rumoured to have been approached originally by Dean Edwards when he was setting up the original consortium. Did the board offer TUST first choice, then when that was refused went with a second option?
|
|
hector
TFF member
Posts: 1,311
|
Post by hector on Oct 31, 2016 6:49:15 GMT
From the noises David Phillips makes, I can't ever imagine TUST being first choice.
|
|
|
Post by plainmoorpete on Oct 31, 2016 9:17:33 GMT
From the noises David Phillips makes, I can't ever imagine TUST being first choice. If that is the case, then the only possible reason the board invited TUST to undertake the independent financial review and the subsequent meeting was to force the hand of another prospective bidder. Anyway things should be clearer in the next 24 hours.
|
|